Flight Safety Information
August 21, 2013 - No. 172
In This Issue
WHY THE UPS CRASH IS SUCH A SHOCK
UPS 1354 data suggest approach or equipment anomalies
Autopilot, Autothrottles Engaged in UPS Crash
Safety audit stalls global expansion of Indian
GAO: The feds need better data on firefighting aircraft fleet
Think ARGUS PROS
US drone pilot demand outstrips supply
WOMEN IN AVIATION - SURVEY
GRADUATE RESEARCH SURVEY
WHY THE UPS CRASH IS SUCH A SHOCK
For a widebody twinjet operated by a US carrier into a US airport to crash on final
approach in good weather is a statistical shock. It wouldn't have been such a surprise
ten or 20 years ago, but these things 'just don't happen now', so they are
disproportionately shocking when they do.
Let's look at why it's such a surprise.
* North America's commercial air transport is consistently at the top of the world's safety
league;
* UPS has high safety standards, runs a disciplined safety management system, and
involves its crews in the SMS;
* The aircraft, an Airbus A300-600F, was only ten years old - youthful for an aeroplane -
with relatively low flight hours and cycles for its age;
* The visibility was good and the cloudbase high.
* There was no emergency call.
* It was a routine scheduled flight for UPS.
On the other hand, did the crew face any disadvantages?
* It was just after 05:00 local time when the accident happened, which is a natural
human circadian low point affecting performance (but on the other hand night flying is
mostly what UPS pilots do);
* Runway 18 is not the main runway at Birmingham, it has no glideslope guidance on
approach apart from the precision approach path indicators, and the runway has simple
edge lighting.
That's about it.
If the crew had a problem they didn't tell anyone about it. Of course that could be
because they were too busy dealing with it to make a call. Then the aeroplane got so low
on the approach it hit the ground well before the runway threshold.
A few parts of the world, including the USA, are within reach of the holy grail of zero
fatal accidents in commercial aviation. But what does it take to get there?
When so few accidents happen, lessons from them are important. Although the aviation
world is gradually getting better at gathering and assembling data pointing to where
operational and technical risks lie, the difference between an incident and an accident is
what tipped it over the edge. We want to know what that was at Birmingham, Alabama.
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/learmount/2013/08/why-the-ups-crash-is-such-a-
shock/?cmpid=NLC|FGFG|FGFIN-2013-0820-GLOB#sthash.9L9T0Zgp.dpuf
Back to Top
UPS 1354 data suggest approach or equipment anomalies
Cockpit voice recorder data from the UPS A300-600F freighter that crashed on approach
to Birmingham, Alabama, before sunrise on August 14 reveal an impact with either trees
or terrain 4 seconds after one of the two pilots called out, "runway in sight".
The short time span between runway sighting and ground or tree collision likely indicates
that the pilots were either using a modified instrument approach procedure for Runway
18, or that there was an error or confusion leading them to believe the aircraft was at a
higher altitude.
According to instrument approach charts for the localizer approach to Runway 18, the
non-precision approach which UPS Flight 1354 was using to land that morning, the
aircraft is not to descend below 556 ft. above the ground (1,200 ft mean sea level) until
the pilots visually spot the runway "environment" through the windscreen.
U.S. National Transportation Safety Board member Robert Sumwalt, during a press
briefing on August 16, said there were sounds "consistent with an impact" at 9 seconds
before the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) stopped working, though he did not specify if
those sounds were the aircraft striking tree tops in a neighborhood along the final
approach, or the impact of the A300 on a hillside approximately 0.5 mi. before the
runway end. He did say investigators looking at the A300's Pratt & Whitney PW4158
engines determined that it had ingested "trees and dirt".
Either way, the A300 was much lower than it should have been on the localizer 18
approach if pilots sighting the runway only 4 seconds before the sounds of an impact
with an object at or near ground level. Typically, pilots begin descending from the
minimum descent altitude (556 ft. AGL in this case) upon sighting the runway, which
means that 4 seconds after sighting the runway, the aircraft should have been hundreds
of feet above terrain.
For a localizer approach, pilots use the ground-based localizer for left-right guidance and
the aircraft's barometric altimeter for altitude information. Without vertical guidance, the
approach is considered "non-precision" and has higher minimums (the lowest altitude to
which the aircraft can descend without pilots having the runway in sight) compared to a
precision approach. Birmingham's other runway has an instrument landing system (ILS)
precision approach with vertical and horizontal guidance, but the runway was not usable
that morning due to work in progress on its centerline lighting system, said Sumwalt.
When completing the approach visually, pilots generally use the precision approach path
indicator (PAPI) system located near the runway, a row of four white or red lights that
show the aircraft's vertical position with respect to the ideal glideslope. Sumwalt says
the FAA tested the PAPI after the accident and found it to be accurate.
Aircraft performance and energy appeared normal based on initial indications from the
flight data recorder (FDR). Sumwalt said control inputs and aircraft flight control surfaces
appear to correlate properly and engines indicated normal operations.
The aircraft's autopilot was engaged until the last second of FDR data and the
autothrottle system was engaged through the end of the data, said Sumwalt, with the
recorded airspeed tracking the autoflight selected airspeed of about 140 kt., which is
consistent with the expected approach speed for A300. Sumwalt noted that the CVR
operated for a few seconds after the FDR stopped.
Sumwalt also reported that 3 seconds before a pilot called "runway in sight", there were
two audible "sink rate" alerts issued by the enhanced ground proximity warning system,
indicating a descent rate that was outside the bounds of the expected descent rate for
the speed, altitude and aircraft configuration at the time.
The NTSB plans to fly another UPS A300 on the approach to Birmingham in the next few
weeks to observe the company's procedures for using the Runway 18 localizer approach,
says Sumwalt.
http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckBlogId=Blog:7a78f54e-b3dd-4fa6-ae6e-
dff2ffd7bdbb&plckPostId=Blog%3A7a78f54e-b3dd-4fa6-ae6e-
dff2ffd7bdbbPost%3A54f0d442-ae8e-4fa6-afed-5e4f87157538
Back to Top
Autopilot, Autothrottles Engaged in UPS Crash
Raising questions about what role automation may have played in the August 14 UPS
crash at Birmingham Shuttlesworth International Airport, the NTSB revealed that the
Airbus A300's autopilot and autothrottles were engaged all the way to the point of
impact about three quarters of a mile short of the runway.
According to the NTSB, the crew briefed the localizer approach to Runway 18 as they
descended toward the airport on the 45-minute flight from Louisville, Kentucky. The
captain of the Airbus A300-600 was flying with a selected approach speed of 140 knots,
said NTSB board member Robert Sumwalt. That speed would have been consistent with
the A300 at its landing weight.
Two minutes before the end of the cockpit voice recording the A300 was cleared to land
on Runway 18. As the A300 approached the airport from the north, 7 seconds prior to
impact, an audible "sink rate, sink rate" warning was heard from the ground proximity
warning system in the cockpit. Four seconds before impact one of the pilots announced
that the runway was in sight.
The A300 struck trees short of the runway before impacting a grassy rise and bursting
into flames, killing both crew members. The FAA over the weekend flight checked the
PAPI system for Runway 18 and found that it was properly aligned with the approach
path. Next investigators plan to fly the Runway 18 localizer approach in a UPS A300 with
a qualified UPS crew to observe the company's operating procedures.
All aircraft systems appear to have been functioning normally at the time of the crash,
according to a preliminary readout of the flight data recorder. Sumwalt said controllers
did not receive a minimum safe altitude warning at any point during the A300's
approach.
http://www.flyingmag.com/technique/accidents/autopilot-autothrottles-engaged-ups-
crash#Op6lMAkpkedv6S8B.99
Back to Top
Safety audit stalls global expansion of Indian
In June, Air India sought permission from Japanese authorities to start flights to Osaka
using a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, but was told that this may not be allowed.
In June, Air India sought permission from Japanese authorities to start flights to Osaka
using a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, but was told that this may not be allowed. Photo:
Ramesh Pathania/Mint
New Delhi: The poor performance of India in an audit by the United Nations aviation
watchdog of how the country's aviation regulator oversees safety procedures at airlines
has crimped the efforts of Indian airlines to expand their international operations.
Japan has already told India it will not allow any new flights till all safety concerns
highlighted in the report by the International Civil Aviation Organization (Icao) are
addressed, said two government officials with direct knowledge of the matter. Other
countries may follow suit.
In June, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) of the US said it would conduct its
own audit of India's air safety processes. The trigger for this was Icao's December audit.
Icao is currently checking whether India has been able to address all the issues
highlighted in the audit. Its conclusion next month will decide whether Indian airlines
such as Air India Ltd and Jet Airways (India) Ltd can expand their international
operations without too much opposition.
In June, Air India sought permission from Japanese authorities to start flights to Osaka
using a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, but was told that this may not be allowed.
"We had planned to have a hop flight, Delhi-Tokyo-Osaka...," said one of the two
government official said cited above. "...but no new flights can be started unless the
issue between the aviation bodies of the two countries is resolved regarding Icao's
observations. Air India is only incidental to the subject."
The airline has requested aviation regulator Directorate General of Civil Aviation to take
up the matter. The airline has ordered 27 Dreamliners worth $6 billion that are joining
its fleet in a phased manner, month after month, and which need to be deployed on
long-haul international routes.
DGCA wrote to Japan this month asking for a clarification and seeking information about
the status of the request by Air India, said the second official.
After the December Icao audit, Japan had sought from Air India all engineering and
maintenance records of the Boeing 777 that it currently flies between Delhi and Tokyo,
said the first official. This information has been given, he added.
The December audit found India wanting in its ability to oversee safety issues.
"Icao has identified a significant safety concern with respect of the ability of this state
(India) to properly oversee its airlines (air operators) under is jurisdiction," the agency
said in its report, about which Mint reported on 10 March.
Icao clubbed India with Angola, Congo, Djibouti, Eritrea, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti,
Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Malawi, and São Tomé and Príncipe.
In an earlier 2006 audit, Icao had warned India about air safety oversight, after which
the FAA threatened to downgrade India's safety ranking, a move that would have
stopped Indian airlines such as Air India and Jet Airways from adding additional flights to
the US and forcing extra inspections of their aircraft at US airports. The matter was
subsequently taken up by the two governments and resolved.
Still, if the follow-up Icao audit and the FAA audit find the safety issues unresolved, the
US and the European Union, too, may not be inclined to allow new flights by Indian
airlines and will likely wish to review existing ones.
A three-member team from Icao's headquarters is in the capital all of this week for the
closure of audit findings. The FAA audit is scheduled for 9 September.
The FAA confirmed the audit. "I can confirm that, at the government of India's request,
the FAA is sending some people over next month (September)," an FAA spokeswoman
said in an email, but declined comment on whether India faces the threat of a
downgrade in safety rankings.
India has had a patchy air safety record in recent years. Nearly 300 people have lost
their lives between Icao's 2006 audit and the latest one completed in December. The
agency conducts these audits every six years.
As many as 158 people died in the 2010 Air India Express IX-812 crash in Mangalore,
and one plane each of Jet Airways, the defunct Air Deccan and the grounded Kingfisher
Airlines Ltd have been written off in accidents since 2006.
To be sure, the Icao audit does not relate to the safety of Indian airlines, but only audits
the oversight mechanisms of Indian regulator DGCA. Indian airlines typically fly new
aircraft bought from Boeing Co. and Airbus SAS.
Mohan Ranganathan, an aviation analyst and a member of the government-appointed
Civil Aviation Safety Advisory Council, said the civil aviation ministry needs to strengthen
its regulatory oversight.
Most of the issues raised concerns about DGCA's ability to oversee safety, he added, and
with state-owned Air India's expansion being affected, "it is about time India woke up
instead of trying to sweep things under the carpet and pretend we are a safe aviation
system".
http://www.livemint.com/Politics/pBtvNF16yMqFjEzfIyTT3N/Safety-audit-stalls-global-
expansion-of-Indian-airlines.html
Back to Top
GAO: The feds need better data on firefighting aircraft fleet
The General Accountability Office said Tuesday the federal government should expand its
effort to collect data on its paltry and aging firefighting aircraft fleet so the nation can be
better prepared for a bad fire season.
The number of firefighting airtankers in the national fleet has declined to eight from 44
in 2002 - due to aging planes and several fatal crashes. That has sparked concern
among federal lawmakers that the government is not adequately equipped to handle
several big fires burning at once.
The GAO recommended the federal Departments of Agriculture and Interior review their
assets to better understand what types of aircraft they need to expand.
The GAO report was requested by Democratic Sen. Mark Udall and three other senators
from fire-plagued Western states. Udall has pushed the Defense Department to transfer
excess military aircraft to the U.S. Forest Service to help boost the numbers in the fleet.
The aging fleet also concerns state lawmakers, two of whom - a Democrat from Wheat
Ridge and a Republican from Grand Junction - in March urged the state to buy its own
fleet so it wouldn't have to wait for the feds.
Colorado wildfires burned nearly 700 homes and killed six people in 2012. So far this
year, two people have died and 486 homes burned.
Colorado Division of Fire Prevention and Control director Paul Cooke said the feds do
need to collect more data, but he didn't want that to slow down actually obtaining more
aircraft.
"There is enough experiential information about the effectiveness of large airtankers for
the Forest Service to begin filling this gap," he said. "I am hopeful that the Forest
Service efforts to modernize the national airtanker fleet will not sit idle while the
additional information on aircraft performance and effectiveness is being collected."
http://www.denverpost.com/localpolitics/ci_23904019/gao-feds-need-better-data-more-
firefighting-aircraft
Back to Top
Back to Top
US drone pilot demand outstrips supply
The US Air Force is now facing a shortage in the number of pilots able to operate the
military's quickly expanding drone fleet, according to a new report published by a top
Washington, DC, think tank.
According to Air Force Colonel Bradley Hoagland, who contributed to a recent report on
the Air Force's drone program prepared by the Brookings Institution, it is quickly hitting
a wall in the number of operators for its 159 Predators, 96 Reapers and 23 Global
Hawks.
Although the US military aimed to train 1,120 'traditional' pilots along with 150
specialized drone pilots in 2012, it proved unable to meet the latter, owing to a lack of
RPA (or remotely piloted aircraft) volunteers.
A recent report by AFP placed the Air Force's current drone pilot wing at 1,300, about
8.5 percent of the air corps' pilots.
Still, an increasing number of uses for America's drone fleet, including recently-revealed
plans by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) for drones able to
operate from naval vessels, have quickly exceeded the Air Force's ability to train
personnel to train and pilot unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).
One of the biggest hurdles faced by the Air Force drone program is a high rate of
attrition among its pilots, which is three times higher than that of traditional aircraft
pilots.
A Predator drone operated by U.S. Office of Air and Marine (OAM), takes off for a
surveillance flight near the Mexican border.(AFP Photo / John Moore)A Predator drone
operated by U.S. Office of Air and Marine (OAM), takes off for a surveillance flight near
the Mexican border.(AFP Photo / John Moore)
Underpinning that rate of personnel loss are low potential for advancement, owing to the
drone fleet's high frequency of CAPs, or combat air patrols.
Compared to traditional manned aircraft, it usually takes three to four drones to
constitute what the Air Force considers a combat air patrol. Ultimately, drone operators
face a punishing rotation, with little time left for additional education and training leading
to rank advancement.
The Brookings report indicates that, compared to other military tracks, drone pilots face
a 13 percent lower promotion rate to the rank of major in the last five years.
"In the next 20-30 years these things are going to explode," Gen. Mark Welsh, the Air
Force chief of staff, said to a conference last September. That particular quote was
included in a recent Wired report highlighting some budget cuts to America's drone
program, which will experience a decrease of $866 million in 2014's total budget of $1.3
billion for drone research.
Yet the long-term outlook for unmanned aerial vehicles among the Air Force appears
strong, a fact highlighted by the military's inability to keep pace in its training
requirements. Despite budget cuts in research, the Air Force is still planning to acquire
an extended-range version of its MQ-9 Reaper drone, for example.
Even more indicative of the drone program's continued resilience is the US military's
unsuccessful bid to cancel purchase of Northrop Grumman's hulking Global Hawk drones,
which generated an intense lobbying blitz by the manufacturer.
Those cutbacks would have saved the US $2.5 billion over the next five years, according
to projections cited by the Center for Public Integrity.
http://rt.com/usa/us-running-out-drone-pilots-765/
Back to Top
WOMEN IN AVIATION - SURVEY
The International Labour Organization is inviting all women who work in the aviation
industry, to complete thefollowing online questionnaire:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/ILOWOMENAVIATION
(simplyclick the above link, or cut&paste the link intoyour web browser)
Itis designed to be completed by any female aviationworker (above the wing, below the
wing andmanagerial/administrativepositions)
Please forward this email to all your female colleagues inaviation.
Why is this important?
Transportis one of several sectors which have been traditionallyregarded as no place for
women. These male-dominatedindustries have in the past resisted the encroachment
ofwomen and although conditions of work may be improving,it is happening at a snail's
pace. Even today, inaviation, women are underrepresented. In the USA, forexample,
only 5 per cent of all pilots 'for hire' arewomen and 4 per cent of all pilots who report
that they'make a living from flying' are women. The same is trueof many other women
aviation workers such as those whostrive to make it to the executive boards of
aviationcompanies, those who operate as aircraft engineers andthose who work in air
navigation services. The aviationindustry is by and large a sector which is closed to
thevast majority of women.
The International LabourOrganization's (ILO) mandate to promote gender equalityin the
world of work is enshrined in its Constitutionand reflected in relevant international
labourstandards. It was therefore decided that the SectoralActivities Department
(SECTOR) of the ILO beginresearching the working conditions of women
transportworkers. The ILO's study will identify and prioritisethe issues and obstacles
facing women workingindifferent transport sectors, during different phasesof a career
cycle, from applying for a job to beingsuccessful in a career. The study will also
identifypossible solutions for governments', employers' andworker' organizations to
address these issues and maketransport a more attractive sector to women.
Goodpractices by employer organisations and case studies ofwomen who have 'made it'
in their chosen career willalso be included. As a result the perspective of womenaviation
workers will be invaluable for this study,highlighting the significant barriers which face
womenthroughout their career, sharing good and badexperiences and expelling advice
for the futuregenerations.
For more informationabout "Women inAviation"visit our Facebook page and "like"us:
www.facebook.com/pages/Women-in-Aviation-Exhibition
You can also visit our web pages:www.wai.org
and e-mail us at:Exhibition@fldnet.de
Back to Top
GRADUATE RESEARCH SURVEY
Commercial Airline Pilot Informal Learning Survey-Request for Participant's,
Recent aviation accidents have highlighted the need to understand all aspects of
commercial airline pilot training and learning. The Federal Aviation Administration's 2010
Call to Action recognized that current pilot training practices may need to be modified or
changed. The one-size fits all approach to pilot training may no longer be sufficient in
today's aviation environment. While there have been numerous studies on commercial
airline pilots' formal learning, little is known about pilots informal learning activities,
perceptions of informal learning, and opinions on how airlines should support informal
learning. This study intends to answer those questions.
If you are currently US part 121 commercial airline pilot, please take a few minutes to let
us know how you learn outside of the training center. The survey is anonymous and
should take approximately 10 - 15 minutes to complete. Click here to access the survey,
or you can paste the link into your browser:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/FMDFJRM
Please note that the results of the study will be aggregated and will be available upon
request at the conclusion of the study.
For more information, or to receive a paper copy of the survey, please contact the
researcher below.
Thank you for your time.
Kevin Corns
Principle Investigator
Capella University
kcorns2@capellauniversity.edu
Curt Lewis